he already left once. don't see it as bad this time if it happens, since it seems theres actually a sort of heads up about it
He's not totally right. As a fan, my mindset is much more aligned with the owner than the player. It's an employer mindset. I'm not changing teams I root for. In fact despite the NBA being the ultimate players league, I don't root for players. I root for my team. So is it illogical that as a fan who ultimately pays for the product and thus the employees... who ARE the product... that I wouldn't care when something happens to the low end product but would care a lot when something happens to he high end product?? Of course not. That's only logical. Is it logical to burn IT jerseys? Absolutely not. IT didn't choose to leave. Is it logical for Utah fans to be upset about Hayward leaving... sure... even if it's ok for Utah or other teams to trade players.
You have no way of proving how the 2016 finals turn out if the Cavs had Thomas and Crowder instead of Kyrie. And it doesn't matter anyway. The Cavs are better equipped to beat the Warriors after the trade than before, unless Thomas' hip is worse than expected or Kyrie fixes his flaws in Boston. They can start Thomas-Smith-Crowder-Lebron-Tristan(or Love) against the Warriors lineup of death, with the only defensive liability being Thomas. Last year, they had two defensive liabilities in Irving and Love on the court against that lineup. Then they have a likely top 5 pick they could trade for a star. Or they could move Love for a comparable player that is a better fit against Golden State.
The gap is absolutely as wide as it was seemed. The Cavs only won a game because of a record shooting performance. In game 3, they played incredibly well and it still wasn't enough. And who cares about the opinion of Warriors fans? All that shows me is they don't realize that Thomas was better than Irving last year, despite being the focal point of his team while Irving shared the floor with the best player in basketball.
think clev played well enough to win game 3 and they were winning with less than a minute left. it took a cold blooded pull up 3 by KD on Lebron to suck the life outta of Clev in that moment.
They played their A game in game 3 and still got beat. Sure, they played well enough to win, but they had no margin for error, despite how well they played. Then in game 4, they had a record setting performance shooting the ball, and finally won a game. Trying to outscore the Warriors is a recipe for disaster.
that goes for any team playing against a historic team like GS. Your margin for error is going to be very slim. it doesn't just go for clev you say trying to outscore the warriors is a disaster but that's the only way you're going to give youself a chance. you're not going to stop a team loaded with that much talent from scoring. that's just not happening
Of course any team's margin of error is slim against Golden State, but when it takes a historically great shooting effort to beat them, the gap is as wide as it appears. They came close but lost playing their A game. It took an A+ game to win. To beat the Warriors, you need a roster of two way players that can both score with them and slow their high powered offense down somewhat. Any liabilities offensively or defensively will get exposed.
and there's probably only a handful of guys that are legitimately considered "2 way" players so then what
You do what the Rockets are doing, pairing good perimeter defenders like Tucker, Ariza and Paul with an excellent offensive minded head coach and team. Or you just concede and focus on rebuilding or putting an entertaining team on the floor for your fans. You are not going to beat a team 4 out of 7 times with the talent level of Golden State if you can't hold them to somewhere between 100-110 points in today's NBA. Trying to win 4 games out of 7 140-130 against a team with Durant, Curry and Thompson is just not happening.
Cleveland has the same type of players as houston. rockets aren't the only ones "doing it" its as if you're saying the exact same thing I've been saying yet trying to be different in whatever way
Never said the Rockets are the only ones doing it. I simply used them as an example of how to try to assemble a team with a puncher's chance against the Warriors. Where you and I disagree is your repeated statement that the only way to beat Golden State is to outscore them. Cleveland tried that with some of the best offensive talent in the league and won one game due to a historic shooting effort. Playing two bad defenders in Irving and Love at the same time versus Golden State was a recipe for disaster, as was sticking Kyle Korver on Durant for stretches. By getting Crowder, it means they can run a lineup with only one poor defender ( Thomas) when the Warriors go small. If they can move Love or the Nets pick for another good wing or an upgrade on Tristan Thompson that can guard Draymond, then they have a shot. The Cavs never tried to slow down the tempo and grind games out against the Warriors. All they did was play right into Golden State's hand. The Warriors are a great team no matter what, but there's a reason they struggle with Memphis at times and the Celtics with Avery Bradley played them tough. Also, if Kawhi doesn't have his ankle stepped on by Zaza, the Spurs win game 1 of that series. What do all of those teams have in common? They pride themselves on making teams work hard on offense and are incredibly disciplined on both ends of the floor.
Honestly this still doesn't really say anything different. It should be common sense that you have to be respectable defensively but at the end of the day you need to be able to score in the 100s to beat that historical GS team but nobody is stopping them from doing that. Every single lineup with come out with "bad defenders" so as much are you're criticizing clev it's no different here You seem to be stuck on this idea that they should do this and that and it's the absolute correct way to beast GS. In reality it's not that easy
